The Commerce Clause and the All Powerful Congress

[FA_Q2]

If we are going to be referring to this section it should be posted in its entirety.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

 

[code1211]

Again..a militia.

Not to be funded for more then 2 years without a vote.

There's no such stipulation on the navy.

And the clause you quoted also provides for the power to levy taxes, promote the general welfare and the ability to regulate commerce.

And yeah..I believe in a progressive tax system. The rich use more resources..they should pay for it.

Congress MUST ( according to the Constitution ) provide for the Common Defense, there's nothing to suggest this is to be only a "temporary" force.

As far as using the Welfare Commerce excuse: The real problem is the Government hasn't proven itself to be more "fiscally" effective than in the private sector. Especially with the recent PUSH, by Obama and the Democrats, to add National Health Care to the Federal budget. Now we can already see how well the Federal Government runs things like Social Security, Medicare, or even the United States Post Office. In fact Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid make up 40.9% of the total US Budget, compared to the discretionary defense fund of 20.5%. Each example I'm sure you'd say are are VERY cost effective, and there is no need to question any of them of being financially sound and very cost efficient. After all, it's the Federal Government we are talking about.
Of Course if you can site me an example of how efficient the Government can run things, I'd be more than happy to have you inform of of such "projected government standard of excellence".
Social Security (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

I can also see how the "rich paying for it" has helped the economy over the past two years under Obama. The threat of raising taxes has only slowed or stalled the economy, as unemployment has only dropped by a total of 1% since Obama took office. The problem with the left, is they desire to offer all these programs ( under the "claim" it's covered under the Welfare and Commerce Clause ) without any real long term plan of how to pay for them. AGAIN all these programs already make up 40.9% of our total US budget BEFORE the addition of Health Care. Such additional programs will only lead to a faster track towards a higher deficit, and risking the solvency of the US dollar.

A note in passing:

Unemployment was an astronomical 7.7% in January, 2009.

It has recently droipped to 9.0%.

The Big 0 wishes that his programs had made the rate drop by 1%. Don't we all?

 

[Sallow]

Again..a militia.
Not to be funded for more then 2 years without a vote.

That's the --army-- that's not to be funded for more than 2 years, not the militia.
How does this support your position?

And the clause you quoted also provides for the power to levy taxes, promote the general welfare and the ability to regulate commerce.

Bzzzt. Nope. Try again.

The army was meant to be drawn from militias...try again.

 

[Sallow]

Article I. Section 8. Clause 1:
"The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare for the United States; but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."

Article I. Section 8. Clause 16:
'To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."

If Congress was to "organize", "arm" and "discipline" the Militia, that doesn't sound like the Founders wanted a group of "amateur" soldiers defending their new country.





So outside of Health Care, we should make sure everyone owns their own home, gets the automobile of their choice ( or two, let's after all not be stingy, and the Chevy Volt was a great government investment ), maybe even free high tech electronics like a plasma tv to make you even more comfortable and relaxed. Did I leave anything out, that perhaps you think the commerce and welfare clause ought to cover? After all, there are no limits with your view of the Constitution now is there?





Yes you think the rich ought to be taxed endlessly to provide for everyone else in the county, and its the middle class and the poor who REALLY need the tax breaks. I'm sure there were plenty of times when an individual making under $50,000 was able to offer you a job, as long as you had an impressive resume. Makes perfect sense in an economy like this, to continue to tax the big "wealthy business owners" into thinking they will still have enough left over to provide you with enough employment to feed your family. Is this perhaps the reason why Obama and the Democrats have struggled for so long to get the private sector to start hiring? After all, we have seen the many successes found in the unemployment numbers [throughout Obama's first two years in office] to prove promoting taxing the wealthiest of Americans actually works.

Again..a militia.

Not to be funded for more then 2 years without a vote.

There's no such stipulation on the navy.

And the clause you quoted also provides for the power to levy taxes, promote the general welfare and the ability to regulate commerce.
And yeah..I believe in a progressive tax system. The rich use more resources..they should pay for it.

Bad reading comprehension here. The power is to
" The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,"

In order TO

"to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare for the United States;

But they must BE:

but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."

So, no, congress does not get unlimited power from the commerce clause and general welfare does not mean that congress can do anything they want to promote it. The power is NOT to promote the general welfare. THEY CAN TAX, THAT'S IT. They CAN spend that money to promote the general welfare but it is NOT an open ended power in of itself. That is why the mandate is unconstitutional as with MANY other things the congress does/wants to do. The heart of that is the fact that congress can tax for the general welfare AKA: pay for police, fire and the like. The funny thing is that the single payer WOULD be constitutional under this even though it would be a disaster but that is for another thread. The power in this clause is NOT open ended but it is actually rather specific. What is more open ended is what congress can spend the money on.

Ridiculous.

None of that is specified or enumerated.

It wasn't specific for a reason. These weren't idiots that wrote the Constitution.

 

[Sallow]

So under this limitation:
Doctors should not be forced to acquire licenses from the government.
Lawyers should not be forced to acquire licenses from the government.

You know these are state, not federal, licenses right?
And they are not from a government agency per se, but the relevant professional associations/boards?
The answer: Obviously not.


See: Strawman - "Moral High ground"



Again: State, not federal codes.


Like... cocaine?

There are more..and I could continue...

And you'd only continue to illustrate your complete lack of understanding of the issue.

Oh look - no response from Sallow.

When a post warrants a response..I give it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You know these are state, not federal, licenses right?
And they are not from a government agency per se, but the relevant professional associations/boards?
The answer: Obviously not.


See: Strawman - "Moral High ground"



Again: State, not federal codes.


Like... cocaine?


And you'd only continue to illustrate your complete lack of understanding of the issue.

Oh look - no response from Sallow.

When a post warrants a response..I give it.

And when you cannot form an effective response... which is most of the time... you dodge it.
Thus, my criticisms of your post stand, negating any point you may have tried to make.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Again..a militia.
Not to be funded for more then 2 years without a vote.

That's the --army-- that's not to be funded for more than 2 years, not the militia.
How does this support your position?

And the clause you quoted also provides for the power to levy taxes, promote the general welfare and the ability to regulate commerce.

Bzzzt. Nope. Try again.

The army was meant to be drawn from militias...try again.

Nothing in the Constitution supports this, or any of your other similar claims.

Historically, conceptually, legally and Constitutionally, the standing army anf the milita are seperate entities. The connection you continue to try to make does not exist.

 

[FA_Q2]

Again..a militia.

Not to be funded for more then 2 years without a vote.

There's no such stipulation on the navy.

And the clause you quoted also provides for the power to levy taxes, promote the general welfare and the ability to regulate commerce.
And yeah..I believe in a progressive tax system. The rich use more resources..they should pay for it.

Bad reading comprehension here. The power is to
" The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,"

In order TO

"to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare for the United States;

But they must BE:

but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."

So, no, congress does not get unlimited power from the commerce clause and general welfare does not mean that congress can do anything they want to promote it. The power is NOT to promote the general welfare. THEY CAN TAX, THAT'S IT. They CAN spend that money to promote the general welfare but it is NOT an open ended power in of itself. That is why the mandate is unconstitutional as with MANY other things the congress does/wants to do. The heart of that is the fact that congress can tax for the general welfare AKA: pay for police, fire and the like. The funny thing is that the single payer WOULD be constitutional under this even though it would be a disaster but that is for another thread. The power in this clause is NOT open ended but it is actually rather specific. What is more open ended is what congress can spend the money on.

Ridiculous.

None of that is specified or enumerated.

It wasn't specific for a reason. These weren't idiots that wrote the Constitution.

So... you are going to ignore the rest of the article because it does not agree with your ridiculous notions? AND your ignoring the simple English that I pointed out? Where is your counterpoint that illustrates they didn't mean what they actually said?